Penalty phase August 29 th 2002 – 1
Ron Lawrence (mechanical designer), Carmen Genovese (vice-president of engineering)
–O0O–
(THE FOLLOWING OCCURRED OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:
(PROCEEDINGS NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.)
(END OF PROCEEDINGS OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY.)
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. WELCOME BACK.
JUST BECAUSE IT WAS A GOOD NIGHT FOR COUCH POTATOES DIDN’T MEAN IT WAS A GOOD NIGHT FOR SAN DIEGO SPORT FRANCHISES UNFORTUNATELY. THOSE OF YOU THAT WATCHED THE FOOTBALL GAME DURING HALFTIME WERE EXPOSED TO SOME TELEVISION COVERAGE RELATIVE TO THE TRIAL. I’M ASSUMING YOU JUST LOOKED ANOTHER WAY OR TRIED TO SEE HOW THE PADRES WERE DOING. TONIGHT THE AZTECS START THE SEASON, SO MAYBE WE BETTER HOPE AT THE COLLEGIATE LEVEL.
ALL RIGHT. MR. BOYCE.
MR. BOYCE: WE CALL RON LAWRENCE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. RON LAWRENCE,
CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE DEFENDANT, HAVING BEEN DULY SWORN, TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
THE CLERK: SIR, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL IT FOR THE RECORD.
THE WITNESS: MY NAME IS RON LAWRENCE. R-O-N
L-A-W-R-E-N-C-E. DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:GOOD MORNING, MR. LAWRENCE.A.:GOOD MORNING, BOB.Q.:WHAT IS YOUR OCCUPATION?A.:I AM A MECHANICAL DESIGNER. PRESENTLY I’M SELF-EMPLOYED.Q.:DO YOU KNOW A PERSON BY THE NAME OF DAVID WESTERFIELD?A.:YES, I DO.Q.:DO YOU SEE HIM HERE IN COURT?A.:YES, I DO.Q.:AND WHERE IS HE IN COURT?A.:SITTING RIGHT NEXT TO MARION.Q.:IS THAT IN BETWEEN THE LADY ON MY RIGHT AND THE GENTLEMAN AT THE END?A.:YES.Q.:ARE YOU MARRIED?A.:YES.Q.:HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN MARRIED?A.:TWENTY-EIGHT YEARS.Q.:DO YOU HAVE ANY CHILDREN?A.:THREE CHILDREN.Q.:HOW OLD ARE THEY?A.:MY OLDEST IS TWENTY-FIVE. MY NUMBER TWO IS FIFTEEN. AND MY NUMBER THREE IS THIRTEEN.Q.:HOW LONG HAVE YOU KNOWN DAVID WESTERFIELD?A.:TWENTY-FIVE YEARS.Q.:WHERE DID YOU MEET HIM?A.:I MET HIM AT A COMPANY CALLED HYDRO PRODUCTS.Q.:WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN IN ABOUT 1977?A.:CORRECT.Q.:AND WHAT IS HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:HYDRO PRODUCTS IS A COMPANY THAT WAS — WAS A COMPANY THAT WAS MANUFACTURING UNDERWATER EQUIPMENT, LIGHTING, CAMERAS, REMOTE-CONTROL VEHICLES.Q.:WHAT WAS YOUR JOB AT HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:I WAS DESIGN DRAFTER WORKING IN A DIVISION CALLED VEHICLES, AND WE WERE PRODUCING A REMOTE-CONTROL VEHICLE AT THE TIME.Q.:MR. WESTERFIELD WAS ALSO WORKING THERE?A.:YES, HE WAS. HE WAS IN A DIVISION CALLED SYSTEMS I BELIEVE.Q.:AND TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WHAT WAS HIS JOB AT HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:THE SAME. HE WAS A DESIGN DRAFTER.Q.:DID THE TWO OF YOU WORK TOGETHER AT HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:WE WORKED ALONGSIDE BUT NOT TOGETHER.Q.:DID YOU — AT ANY POINT DID YOU DESIGN ANY PRODUCTS AT HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:YES. I WAS VERY MUCH INVOLVED IN ALL THE VEHICLE DESIGNS. THE UNDERWATER VEHICLES.Q.:WHAT ABOUT MR. WESTERFIELD; WAS HE?A.:AT ONE POINT HE WAS PART OF A PROGRAM CALLED THE 125, WHICH IS A VEHICLE THAT HE MOVED INTO SYSTEMS. AND THEN I CAME ON BOARD, AND HE WAS WORKING ANOTHER — WITH OTHER COMPONENTS, C TRACK, A COUPLE OTHER TELEMETRY-TYPE DEVICES.Q.:NOW, YOU MENTIONED — THE FIRST PRODUCT THAT YOU MENTIONED. CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT THAT IS.A.:THE R.C.V. 150 WAS A DEVICE THAT HELPED MAINLY DO UNDERWATER SURVEILLANCE. IT WOULD KEEP DIVERS OUT OF THE WATER. IT WOULD STAY DOWN AS LONG AS THE OPERATOR UPSTAIRS COULD KEEP AWAKE.Q.:WHAT WAS YOUR JOB IN RELATION TO THAT PRODUCT?A.:MY CAPACITY WAS HELPING TO REALLY DESIGN THE PRODUCT AND GET IT TO MARKETING.Q.:AND WHAT WAS MR. WESTERFIELD’S RESPONSIBILITY?A.:WELL, BEFORE I KNEW HIM, HE HELPED TO WORK ON THE 125, WHICH IS THE SAME, SIMILAR VEHICLE, A LOT SMALLER. AND THEN, LIKE I SAY, WHEN I CAME ON, HE MOVED TO A DIFFERENT DIVISION. HE WAS WORKING ON SOME OTHER THINGS CALLED THE C TRACK AND SOME OTHER UNDERWATER LIGHTING, CAMERAS. I DON’T REMEMBER AT THIS TIME. BUT THE C TRACK WAS A DEVICE THAT WOULD HELP TO MONITOR OCEAN CURRENTS, OCEAN TEMPERATURES FOR WEATHER AND DATA TELEMETRY.Q.:HE WAS ONE OF THE DESIGNERS?A.:YES, HE WAS.Q.:AND THIS WAS A DEVICE THAT — WHAT EXACTLY DID IT DO?A.:LIKE I SAY, IT WOULD JUST — THEY PUT THESE OUT IN THE OCEAN, AND THEY WOULD JUST MONITOR TEMPERATURE AND ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT INFORMATION AND SEND IT BACK TO A MAIN GATHERING POINT.Q.:WAS THERE AN UNDERWATER REMOTE VEHICLE THAT MR. WESTERFIELD WORKED ON?A.:YES, IT WAS. IT WAS THE 125. THEY CALLED IT THE SHORT — THE TORTUGA FOR TURTLE. AND IT WAS A DEVICE THAT WOULD DO THE SAME THING. IN FACT, IT WAS IN MORE PRODUCTION THAN THE 150. IT WAS ON A TETHER. AND, AGAIN, IT WOULD DO THE SAME WORK AS THE 150. IT WOULD GO DOWN, SURVEY OIL PLATFORMS, AND BASICALLY JUST KEEP DIVERS OUT OF THE WATER. THAT WAS THE WHOLE MISSION FOR THESE PRODUCTS WAS TO TAKE THE PLACE OF A DIVER.Q.:WHY WAS IT IMPORTANT TO REPLACE THE DIVER?A.:IN THE YEAR THAT WE WERE WORKING THERE, THEY LOST TWENTY-TWO DIVERS IN THE NORTH SEA ALONE. UP IN ENGLAND. IT’S A VERY HARD, DIFFICULT JOB TO DO. AND I WOULD IMAGINE THE INSURANCE COMPANIES WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THIS DEVICE THERE. BUT THAT WAS ONE OF OUR REASONS IS TO BASICALLY GET THE DEVICE OUT SO THAT IT COULD DO A JOB A LOT LONGER AND SAFER. BECAUSE IF THEY LOST THE DEVICE, SO WHAT. IT WAS JUST A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. BUT IT DIDN’T LOSE A LIFE.Q.:SO THIS WAS A DEVICE THAT SAVED THE LIVES OF DIVERS.A.:YES, IT WAS.Q.:AND THIS IS A DEVICE THAT MR. WESTERFIELD WORKED ON.A.:YES, HE DID. HE HAD PART OF IT.Q.:WHAT OTHER PROJECTS BESIDES THOSE THAT YOU HAVE DESCRIBED DID MR. WESTERFIELD WORK ON TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE?A.:WELL, IT’S BEEN A LONG TIME. HE WAS IN A DIFFERENT DIVISION. I THINK HE HAD A PART TO DO WITH —
MR. DUSEK: OBJECTION. NO FOUNDATION, THEN.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. BASED ON THE ANSWER.
NEXT QUESTION.
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:DID YOU KNOW JACKIE WESTERFIELD?A.:YES, I DID.Q.:DID SHE WORK AT HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:YES, SHE DID.Q.:WHAT WAS HER JOB AT HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:SHE WAS ALSO A DESIGN DRAFTER.Q.:DID THEY GET MARRIED WHILE YOU WERE THERE?A.:NO, THEY DID NOT.Q.:DID THEY MEET WHILE YOU WERE THERE?A.:YES, THEY DID.Q.:DID YOU EVER SOCIALIZE WITH MR. WESTERFIELD?A.:QUITE A BIT.Q.:DID YOU GO TO HIS HOUSE?A.:I’VE BEEN TO ALL THREE HOUSES THAT I KNOW OF HE’S LIVED IN.Q.:TAKE THE TIME PERIOD AROUND HYDRO PRODUCTS; DID YOU GO TO HIS HOUSE DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME?A.:I WAS AT A COUPLE PARTIES THERE, YES.Q.:DID HE COME TO YOUR HOUSE?A.:OH, YES.Q.:WHAT ABOUT YOUR KIDS; DID THEY KNOW HIS KIDS?A.:NO, NOT REALLY.Q.:WHAT TYPE OF OCCASIONS WOULD YOU GO TO MR. WESTERFIELD’S HOUSE SAY DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME, THE EARLY PERIOD OF TIME?A.:WELL, I JUST REMEMBER A COUPLE PARTIES. I THOUGHT THERE WAS A HALLOWEEN PARTY THAT WE WENT TO.Q.:AND WAS THIS FOR BOTH YOUR FAMILIES?A.:JUST MY WIFE AND I AT THE TIME. THIS IS EARLY ON. WE LEFT OUR DAUGHTER HOME. SHE WAS VERY YOUNG.Q.:AT SOME POINT DID YOU LEAVE HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:YES.Q.:WHAT ABOUT MR. WESTERFIELD; DID HE LEAVE?A.:YES.Q.:WHERE DID YOU — DID YOU AGAIN WORK WITH MR. WESTERFIELD LATER?A.:YES. HE CALLED ME UP WITH AN OFFER AT A COMPANY CALLED SUTTER BIOMEDICAL. AND HE KNEW THAT THEY NEEDED SOME HELP. AND HE KNEW MY EXPERTISE. SO HE CALLED ME IN, AND WE WORKED TOGETHER THERE FOR QUITE A FEW YEARS.Q.:DID YOU EVER WORK WITH HIM AT A COMPANY CALLED SPECTRUM DESIGN?A.:ACTUALLY WE STARTED SPECTRUM DESIGN TOGETHER.Q.:AND WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN?A.:1980.Q.:WHO WAS INVOLVED IN THAT?A.:MYSELF, DAVID, AND WES HILL.Q.:HOW LONG WERE YOU AT SPECTRUM DESIGN?A.:IT WAS KIND OF A GARAGE SHOP THING. WE WORKED TOGETHER FOR ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF.Q.:THEN DID YOU LEAVE?A.:YES. I WENT ON TO FORM MY OWN COMPANY.Q.:WHAT COMPANY WAS THAT?A.:MY CURRENT COMPANY IS CONCEPT DESIGN.Q.:AFTERWARDS DID YOU REMAIN FRIENDS WITH MR. WESTERFIELD?A.:VERY MUCH SO.Q.:DID YOUR FAMILIES GO TO HIS HOUSE?A.:NO. NOT AFTER THAT. IT WAS — PARDON ME. NO, WE DID NOT. I APOLOGIZE. NO, WE DID NOT.Q.:DID THEY — WHEN DID YOU SOCIALIZE AFTER THAT?A.:BASICALLY AT WORK. AND WE WOULD GO CAMPING EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, TOO. BUT THAT WAS OUTSIDE OF THE HOMES.Q.:NOW, YOU SAY AT SOME POINT YOU WORKED AGAIN WITH MR. WESTERFIELD AT SUTTER. IS THAT CORRECT?A.:THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:WAS THIS AFTER SPECTRUM DESIGN?A.:YES.Q.:DO YOU RECALL ABOUT WHAT YEAR THAT WAS THAT YOU BEGAN WORKING WITH MR. WESTERFIELD AT SUTTER?A.:1982.Q.:AND THIS, YOU BECAME EMPLOYED AT SUTTER BECAUSE MR. WESTERFIELD RECOMMENDED YOU?A.:CORRECT.Q.:WHO WAS — WHO DID YOU WORK UNDER AT SUTTER?A.:A GENTLEMAN CALLED CARMEN GENOVESE.Q.:DID BOTH MR. WESTERFIELD AND YOU WORK UNDER THE SAME PERSON?A.:YES, WE DID.Q.:HOW LONG DID YOU WORK AT SUTTER?A.:MAYBE ’82 TO ’89, SEVEN YEARS.Q.:AND WAS IT DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME THAT YOU CONTINUED TO SEE MR. WESTERFIELD AND HIS FAMILY?A.:YES.Q.:YOU WENT CAMPING WITH HIM?A.:YES.Q.:DID YOU KNOW MR. WESTERFIELD’S CHILDREN?A.:YES, I DID.Q.:WHAT WERE THEIR NAMES?A.:LISA AND NEAL.Q.:DID NEAL EVER DO ANY DESIGN WORK FOR YOU OR MR. WESTERFIELD TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE?A.:NO. BUT I POPPED INTO HIS HOUSE AND WITNESSED NEAL HELPING HIM OUT. I WAS VERY PROUD TO SEE THAT HAPPEN.Q.:NEAL WAS WORKING FOR HIS FATHER?A.:YES. YES.Q.:WAS MR. WESTERFIELD GENEROUS WITH HIS TIME?A.:VERY GENEROUS.Q.:WITH YOU?A.:YES.Q.:DID YOU CONTINUE TO VISIT MR. WESTERFIELD AT HIS HOUSE?A.:YES.Q.:WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THAT YOU VISITED MR. WESTERFIELD?A.:IT WAS TWO DAYS BEFORE HE WAS ARRESTED.Q.:WHERE WAS THIS?A.:AT HIS HOME.Q.:AND WHO WERE YOU WITH?A.:MYSELF AND CARMEN WENT TO VISIT AND JUST SHOW A LITTLE SUPPORT.Q.:MR. LAWRENCE, I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU SOME EXHIBITS THAT HAVE BEEN MARKED AS, FIRST OF ALL, COURT’S EXHIBIT 213. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THIS?A.:YES, I DO.
(DRAWING MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 213 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:AND THAT SEEMS TO BE A DRAWING. WHAT DOES THAT DRAWING DESCRIBE?A.:THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL DRAWING OF THE R.C.V.150 TO DISPLAY TO MARKETING WHAT THEY WANTED TO BUILD.Q.:WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU AND MR. WESTERFIELD WORKED ON?A.:NO, IT’S NOT. NO. THIS IS A DEVICE THAT I WORKED ON BY MYSELF OR WITH MY TEAM IN THE VEHICLES DIVISION.Q.:THIS WAS THE DEVICE AFTER THE 125, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT.Q.:NOW, WE HAVE — THERE’S A PHOTOGRAPH ON THE BACK OF —A.:THIS IS THE R.C.V. 150 IN WHAT WE CALLED THE GARAGE. IT WAS THE PRODUCT THAT HELPS THE VEHICLE SAFELY GO OVER THE SIDE OF THE SHIP. AND THIS IS DURING SEA TRIALS BASED OFF — I BELIEVE THIS IS OFF THE COAST OF POINT LOMA.Q.:AND THIS IS EXHIBIT — THIS IS ON THE BACK OF EXHIBIT 213, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:YES.Q.:AND THIS IS THE — ALSO THE 150?A.:THIS IS THE PRODUCTION VERSION OF THE 150 WHICH ACTUALLY TURNED OUT A LOT DIFFERENT THAN THIS DID DUE TO MORE MARKETING INPUT AND ITEMS THAT WE ACTUALLY DESIGNED INTO THE PRODUCT.Q.:AND THAT’S ONE OF THE PRODUCTS THAT YOU DESIGNED AT —A.:THIS IS THE PRODUCT I DESIGNED.Q.:— AT HYDRO PRODUCTS.
SHOWING YOU WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS EXHIBIT 214. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT?A.:OKAY. THIS IS A CAMERA, A VERY SMALL CAMERA, THAT WAS USED FOR DROPPING DOWN INSIDE OF REACTOR TUBE VESSELS TO DO INSPECTION. IT HAD A LIGHT SOURCE WRAPPED AROUND THE RING. AND I’M NOT SURE, BUT DAVE MAY HAVE HAD SOME EXPERIENCE ON THIS.
(PHOTOGRAPH MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 214 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:BUT THAT’S ONE OF THE PRODUCTS THAT YOU WORKED ON.A.:THAT’S ONE OF THE PRODUCTS, THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:ON THE BACK OF 214 WE ALSO HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH.A.:THIS IS ONE OF THE PRODUCTS THAT DAVE WORKED ON. THIS IS THE TORTUGA, THE 125.Q.:THESE ARE ALL PRODUCTS THAT YOU AND/OR DAVE WAS WORKING ON AT HYDRO PRODUCTS, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:AND WHAT DID THE PHOTOGRAPH ON THE BACK OF 214, WHAT DID IT DO?A.:THIS IS A PRODUCTION VERSION. THIS IS WHAT THEY SOLD. I’M NOT SURE — THEY SOLD QUITE A FEW, THOUGH; BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WAS USED TO DROP DOWN. IT WOULD GO DOWN TO I BELIEVE A THOUSAND FEET AND SURVEY WITH CAMERA AND HAD ITS OWN MOTOR SYSTEM SO YOU CAN FLY IT AROUND LIKE A REMOTE-CONTROL VEHICLE.Q.:SHOWING YOU WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS EXHIBIT 215. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT PHOTOGRAPH?A.:THESE ARE LIGHTING SYSTEMS. I BELIEVE THESE WERE USED IN REACTORS AS WELL TO ILLUMINATE THE VESSELS UNDER WATER, THE REACTOR CORES.
(PHOTOGRAPH MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 215 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:WAS DAVID WESTERFIELD INVOLVED IN THE DESIGN OF THAT?A.:YES, HE WAS. THIS IS A SYSTEMS PRODUCT.Q.:WAS THAT ALSO USED IN THE REPAIR OF OIL RIGS IN THE NORTH SEA?A.:NO, NO, NO. THIS WAS USED IN REACTOR ROOMS THAT YOU CAN WATCH — THEY WOULD ILLUMINATE THE WHOLE AREA SO YOU CAN SEE UNDER WATER FROM THE SURFACE.Q.:THIS IS ALSO USED TO ASSIST DIVERS, THOUGH, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:NO, NO, NO. THIS IS NOT. THIS IS NOT SEAWATER. THIS IS ONLY USED IN THE REACTOR — REACTOR ROOMS WHERE THE THINGS WERE.Q.:THEN ON THE BACK OF EXHIBIT 215 —A.:NOW, THIS WAS USED ON OIL DERRICKS. AND IT WAS LOWERED DOWN. AND ALL IT WAS IS JUST A CAMERA TO STAY STATIONARY, ONE SPOT. IT WOULD ROTATE, PAN, AND ZOOM. AND THIS WAS ONE OF DAVID’S PRODUCTS.Q.:THIS WAS WHILE YOU WERE AT HYDRO PRODUCTS?A.:YES, IT IS.Q.:THE 150, WHICH IS EXHIBIT 212, THE FIRST ONE THAT WE REFERRED TO, DAVID WORKED ON — THAT’S CALLED THE 150, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:THIS IS CORRECT.Q.:AND DAVID WORKED ON THE 125, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:CORRECT.Q.:NOW, WAS THE TECHNOLOGY ON WHICH YOU DESIGNED THE 150, WAS THAT BASED ON THE TECHNOLOGY FOR THE 125?A.:ABSOLUTELY.Q.:AND THE 125 WAS WHAT DAVID WORKED ON, IS THAT RIGHT?A.:CORRECT.Q.:SO, IN OTHER WORDS, WITHOUT THE 125, WE WOULDN’T HAVE HAD THE 150?A.:RIGHT.
MR. BOYCE: THANK YOU, MR. LAWRENCE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
CROSS-EXAMINATION. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:GOOD MORNING, SIR.A.:GOOD MORNING.Q.:WHAT TYPE OF EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND DO YOU HAVE FOR YOUR WORK?A.:I HAVE AN A. S. DEGREE.Q.:JUNIOR COLLEGE DEGREE?A.:THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:AND HOW ABOUT MR. WESTERFIELD?A.:I BELIEVE HE HAS THE SAME.Q.:THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN CHARGE OF THESE PROJECTS, WERE YOU IN CHARGE?A.:NO, NO. NO.Q.:WAS HE IN CHARGE?A.:NO.Q.:YOU WERE WORKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE?A.:WE WERE A TEAM. WE WERE A TEAM.Q.:WORKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE?A.:CORRECT.Q.:HOW MANY PEOPLE ON A TEAM?A.:IN OUR AREA THERE MIGHT BE TWO PEOPLE INVOLVED WITH THE DRAWING ASPECT, THE DESIGN ASPECT. AND WE HAVE ENGINEERS THAT WE SUPPORT.Q.:I’M TALKING ABOUT THE WHOLE TEAM THAT WAS DESIGNING THESE PROJECTS.A.:THE WHOLE TEAM HERE WOULD PROBABLY BE AROUND TWENTY-FIVE PEOPLE.Q.:AND YOU WERE ONE PART OF THAT TEAM?

A.:CORRECT.Q.:AND HE WAS ONE PART OF THAT TEAM?A.:CORRECT.Q.:DID YOU INVENT ANY OF THESE THINGS?A.:NO. NONE OF THESE.Q.:DID HE INVENT ANY OF THESE THINGS?A.:NO, HE DID NOT.Q.:WHAT DO YOU DO?A.:THEN?Q.:YES.A.:WE WERE DESIGNERS. WE WERE ASKED TO MAKE THIS FIT HERE, AND WE WOULD DESIGN IT SO IT WOULD FIT THERE.Q.:SO SOMEBODY WOULD COME UP WITH THE IDEA OF WHAT WAS NEEDED FOR THE PROJECT?A.:SOMEBODY WOULD COME UP WITH THE PRODUCTS, AND WE WOULD HAVE TO PACKAGE THEM, ATTACH THEM, MAKE THEM PART AS THE WHOLE. AND WE DID THAT WITH — IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE ENGINEERING GROUP AS WELL.Q.:SO THE ENGINEERS WOULD GIVE YOU GUIDANCE?A.:TO A POINT, YES. THEY WOULD GIVE US GUIDANCE. WE WANT TO PUT IT OVER HERE. AND WE WOULD MAKE IT FIT THERE. SO THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID. THEY JUST — THEY POINTED OUT WE NEED TO HAVE THIS HERE, AND WE WOULD MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS MOUNTED THERE AND WORKING THERE.Q.:THAT WAS PART OF YOUR JOB?A.:IT WAS.Q.:IT WAS PART OF HIS JOB?A.:CORRECT.Q.:AND SOMEONE ELSE CAME UP WITH THE IDEA OF DESIGNING THIS THING TO SAVE ALL THE PEOPLE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEAN.A.:YES.Q.:AND THIS WAS A JOB THAT YOU WORKED FOR HOW LONG?A.:I WAS THERE FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS.Q.:AND HOW LONG WAS THE DEFENDANT THERE?A.:HE WAS THERE EARLIER AND NOT MUCH AFTER. I DON’T KNOW THE EXACT TIME.Q.:DID HE LEAVE BEFORE THE PROJECT WAS OVER?
MR. FELDMAN: FOUNDATION. OBJECTION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
IF YOU KNOW, WITHIN YOUR PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE, YOU MAY ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
THE WITNESS: STATE THE QUESTION AGAIN, PLEASE.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:DID THE DEFENDANT LEAVE BEFORE THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETED?A.:IN HIS CASE HE WORKED ON QUITE A FEW PROJECTS, AND THEY WERE COMPLETED UNDER HIS —Q.:THIS PROJECT.A.:THIS PROJECT RIGHT HERE. HE ACTUALLY CAME IN AND FINISHED UP WITH THIS PROJECT.
MR. BOYCE: WHICH ARE WE —
THE WITNESS: THE 125. THIS ONE HERE.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:125 WHICH APPEARS TO BE THE RED-AND-WHITE-STRIPED BALL-LOOKING THING.A.:CORRECT.Q.:HE WAS THERE WHEN THE PROJECT GOT STARTED.A.:NO. HE WAS THERE TO HELP FINISH IT UP.Q.:SO SOMEONE ELSE GOT IT STARTED.A.:IT STARTED WITH THE MILITARY.Q.:AND A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER PEOPLE GOT IT GOING UNTIL HE GOT THE JOB TO BE PART OF IT.A.:YES.Q.:AND HE WAS THERE WHEN IT COMPLETED.A.:YES.Q.:ALONG WITH A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE.A.:YES.Q.:AND HE WAS GETTING PAID DURING THIS TIME, WASN’T HE?A.:YES, HE WAS.Q.:BASICALLY THIS WAS HIS JOB.A.:YES.Q.:HOW ABOUT THE THING THAT’S ON THE BACK. I’M SORRY. 214. WHAT’S THAT?A.:THAT IS A CAMERA. THAT’S USED FOR DROPPING DOWN INSIDE THE REACTOR WELLS.Q.:WERE YOU INVOLVED IN —A.:NO, I WAS NOT.Q.:WAS HE INVOLVED IN THAT?A.:YES, HE WAS.Q.:WAS HE INVOLVED AT THE BEGINNING?A.:I’M NOT SURE. I’M NOT SURE.Q.:WAS HE INVOLVED WHEN IT WAS COMPLETED?A.:YES, HE WAS. I’M SURE HE WAS BECAUSE IT WAS IN PRODUCTION WHEN I WAS THERE.Q.:AND HIS INVOLVEMENT WOULD BE TRYING TO DRAW OR FIGURE OUT HOW TO PUT SOME OF THESE PIECES IN THE RIGHT SPOTS?A.:THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:AND WERE THERE OTHER PEOPLE DOING THAT, TOO?A.:I BELIEVE IN SYSTEMS THERE WAS TWO OR THREE DESIGNERS.Q.:AND IF HE COULDN’T DO THE JOB, THERE WERE OTHER PEOPLE WHO COULD DO THE JOB?A.:YES.Q.:HOW MANY OTHER PEOPLE?A.:WELL, THERE’S TWO OR THREE PEOPLE IN THAT DEPARTMENT.Q.:AND IF HE WERE TO LEAVE, THE COMPANY WOULD BE ABLE TO HIRE OTHER PEOPLE TO DO THAT, WOULDN’T THEY?A.:YES.Q.:LOTS OF PEOPLE TO DO THAT TYPE OF WORK?A.:I DON’T KNOW ABOUT THAT. I TAKE THAT PROUDLY.Q.:OKAY.
BUT IF THEY WERE TO PUT OUT A JOB APPLICATION FOR THAT TYPE OF WORK, THERE WOULD BE AMPLE APPLICANTS, WOULDN’T THERE?
MR. FELDMAN: RELEVANCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: THERE WOULD BE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO DO THAT. BUT I DON’T KNOW ABOUT AMPLE. TAKES THE RIGHT KIND OF PERSON TO BE ABLE TO SIT DOWN AND COME UP WITH THESE. IT’S LIKE A JIGSAW; IT TAKES A LITTLE BIT OF EXPERTISE.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:WHEN HE LEFT, WAS HIS POSITION FILLED?A.:I’M SURE IT WAS. UNLESS — I’M NOT SURE. I THINK THE COMPANY WAS BEGINNING TO FOLD, SO IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A MORE OR LESS A CUTBACK.Q.:YOU DON’T KNOW FOR SURE, THOUGH?A.:I DO NOT KNOW FOR SURE.Q.:IN FACT, YOU HAD ALREADY LEFT BEFORE HE LEFT.A.:CORRECT. CORRECT.Q.:WHY DID YOU LEAVE?A.:BIGGER AND BETTER THINGS.Q.:YOU HAD NO EMOTIONAL TIE TO THIS PROJECT?A.:I LOVED THE PRODUCT; I JUST HATED THE COMPANY. I’M SORRY. I DON’T LIKE PLAYING POLITICS. AND EVERY TIME WE GOT A NEW PRESIDENT COME IN, I JUST KEPT MY GEAR IN THE BOX AND HAD TO MOVE TO THE NEXT PLACE. DAVE REMEMBERS THAT WELL.Q.:WHEN WERE YOU DOING THE WORK ON THIS PROJECT THAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT?A.:WHEN?Q.:YES.A.:STARTED THERE IN 1977 WHEN MY FIRST DAUGHTER WAS BORN.Q.:AND IS THAT WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS DOING THE WORK ON IT?A.:YES, THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:SO WE’RE TALKING —A.:TWENTY-FIVE YEARS AGO.Q.:— TWENTY-FIVE YEARS AGO.A.:YES.Q.:HOW LONG WAS HE THERE?A.:LIKE I SAY, I DON’T KNOW WHEN HE STARTED. AND I DON’T KNOW WHEN HE LEFT. BUT HE WAS THERE DURING THE TWO, TWO AND A HALF YEARS I WAS THERE.Q.:AND THAT’S WHEN YOU FIRST GOT TO KNOW HIM?A.:YES.Q.:THERE WAS ANOTHER PROJECT THAT YOU GOT INVOLVED WITH HIM AT SOME OTHER LOCATION?A.:YES.Q.:WHAT WAS THE NEXT ONE?A.:WELL, WE WORKED TOGETHER AT SUTTER BIOMEDICAL.Q.:AND I’M TRYING TO WORK MY WAY —A.:OKAY.Q.:— CHRONOLOGICALLY.A.:OKAY. THIS IS 1982.Q.:’82 WAS WITH SUTTER?A.:YES.Q.:SO THAT’S TWENTY YEARS AGO.A.:YES.Q.:HE WAS ALREADY THERE.A.:YES.Q.:HE WAS DOING THE SAME WORK THAT HE WAS DOING AT THE EARLIER PROJECT.A.:YES. EXCEPT FOR A DIFFERENT INDUSTRY. BEFORE WE WERE INTO VERY COMMERCIAL, ALMOST MILITARY. AND NOW WE’RE INTO MEDICAL.Q.:AND, AGAIN, OTHER PEOPLE WOULD COME UP WITH THE IDEAS AND THE DESIGNS AND THE IMAGINATION TO CREATE THE PROJECT.
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. COMPOUND.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ANSWER — I MEAN THE QUESTION?
THE WITNESS: YES, I DO.
GO AHEAD.
WELL, IN THIS CASE NOW WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF EXPERTISE WITH US. AND NOW WE WERE BEING APPROACHED BY DOCTORS AND MARKETING PEOPLE. AND THEY SAY WE HAVE A NEED, AND WE WOULD HELP PRODUCE THEIR NEED. WE WOULD HELP PRODUCE THE PRODUCTS THAT THEY NEEDED.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMPANY?A.:THERE WERE SIXTY, BUT IN THE ENGINEERING THERE WERE ONLY FOUR. I’M TALKING FOUR ENGINEERS. THAT’S IT. FOUR PEOPLE. THERE WAS ONE, TWO, ONE ENGINEER WHO WAS FULL TIME, AND THERE WAS ONE AVERAGE, TWO ENGINEERS FULL TIME, ONE WAS A STUDENT.Q.:AND THE ENGINEER WAS A CREDENTIALED COLLEGE GRADUATE?A.:THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT.Q.:AND HE WOULD BE IN CHARGE OF YOUR PROJECT?A.:HE WOULD BE A LIAISON WITH OUR PROJECT. DAVE WOULD — ACTUALLY IN SOME CASES WAS THE PROJECT MANAGER.Q.:IN OTHER CASES WHO WAS THE PROJECT MANAGER?A.:DEPENDS ON WHAT THE PRODUCT WAS, BECAUSE THERE’S MANY PRODUCTS, SO WE ALL HAD OUR OWN PERSONAL PRODUCTS. PERSONAL PROJECTS. SORRY.Q.:THIS WAS A JOB THAT HE HAD DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME?A.:YES.Q.:AND HE DID THE WORK AT THE COMPANY.A.:YES.Q.:LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE AT THE COMPANY.A.:YES.Q.:AND WHEN HE LEFT, SOMEBODY TOOK HIS JOB.A.:NO.
Q DID THE COMPANY GO BELLY UP?A.:THEY SHUT DOWN ALL OF ENGINEERING.Q.:THERE WERE OTHER PEOPLE THAT COULD DO HIS JOB, WEREN’T THERE?A.:YES.Q.:COULD YOU DO HIS JOB?A.:YES.Q.:HOW MANY OTHER PEOPLE COULD DO HIS JOB?A.:ANYBODY WHO MET THE CRITERIA.Q.:WHICH WAS?A.:ANYBODY WHO MET THE CRITERIA FOR HIS JOB.Q.:THE CRITERIA WAS?A.:WITH AN ENGINEERING BACKGROUND OR DESIGN BACKGROUND THAT COULD FACILITATE THE OVER-ALL PROJECT ITSELF WHICH WAS NOT JUST DESIGNING BUT MAKING SURE THAT THE DEADLINES WERE MET, SUPPLIERS WERE RESPONSIBLE.Q.:WAS THERE AN EDUCATION REQUIREMENT?A.:NO.Q.:SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO USE THE COMPUTER?A.:YES.Q.:YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE ORGANIZED?A.:LET ME GO BACK TO THAT LAST QUESTION. WHEN WE WERE DOING THIS, COMPUTERS WERE NOT BIG THEN.Q.:OKAY.A.:BUT HE — IN FACT, I WAS PRETTY AMAZED. HE HAD HIS OWN LITTLE APPLE, AND HE USED THAT TO THE — BY ACTUALLY WITH THE FLOW OF THE PRODUCT, HE WAS PRETTY GOOD. I WAS IMPRESSED. HE GOT — HE USED THE COMPUTER FAR DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE NOW USE IT FOR.Q.:TO DO THE JOB YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE ORGANIZED, CORRECT?A.:VERY ORGANIZED.Q.:SOMEONE WHO WOULD GET ON A SCHEDULE AND STAY WITH THE SCHEDULE?A.:HE WAS THAT.Q.:SOMEONE WHO WOULD PLAN WHAT HE WANTED TO DO AND THEN DO WHAT HE HAD PLANNED?A.:IN ORDER TO MAKE THE PRODUCT WORK, YES.Q.:IT WOULD BE VERY GOOD FOR SOMEONE TO HAVE A PLAN AND THEN CARRY OUT THE PLAN, WOULDN’T IT, FOR WHAT HE DID?A.:THAT’S A REQUIREMENT.Q.:AND THAT’S WHAT HE HAD, DIDN’T HE?A.:YES, HE DOES.Q.:THAT WAS ONE OF HIS STRONG SUITS, WASN’T IT?A.:YES, VERY MUCH.Q.:RARELY DID HE DO ANYTHING UNPLANNED, CORRECT?A.:WELL, —
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. VAGUE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:IN HIS WORK IT REQUIRED HIM TO PLAN HIS WORK, THEN WORK HIS PLAN.
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT.
THE WITNESS: YES.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU MAY ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: YES. HE HAD TO WORK HIS PLAN. BUT WE HAD TO THINK OUT OF THE BOX SOMETIMES, TOO, BECAUSE PROBLEMS COME UP. WE NEED TO ADDRESS THOSE ON THE SPOT.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:YOU TALKED ABOUT SPECTRUM. WHAT WAS THAT?A.:THAT WAS A CONSORTIUM BETWEEN DAVID, MYSELF, AND WES HILL. WE WERE — IT WAS A — CALL IT SHADE TREE, MOONLIGHTING. WE WORKED IN THE EVENINGS. LONG HOURS.Q.:SO THAT WAS A COMPANY THAT THE THREE OF YOU FELLOWS ORGANIZED?A.:THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:WHILE YOU WERE WORKING ELSEWHERE.A.:EXACTLY.Q.:AND THE TYPE OF WORK THAT YOU WERE DOING WITH SPECTRUM WAS WHAT?A.:THE SAME. PRODUCT DESIGN.Q.:DESIGNING THINGS FOR OTHER PEOPLE?A.:CORRECT. THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:WHATEVER WOULD COME ALONG, YOU WOULD DESIGN.A.:WITHIN REASON.Q.:ANYTHING THAT YOU FELT YOU KNEW HOW TO DO.A.:THERE YOU GO.Q.:ALL RIGHT. IT WASN’T LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU WERE JUST TAKING THINGS IN THE MEDICAL FIELD OR THE AERONAUTICS FIELD OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.A.:WELL, SOMETIMES WE — IT WAS OVER OUR HEAD. AND, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF LIABILITIES, YOU REALLY WANT TO CHOOSE SOME THINGS. BUT MOST THINGS WE GOT WERE FAIRLY EASY. THEY JUST HAD TO BE DONE. AND WE WERE A GOOD SOURCE TO DO THAT.Q.:AND YOU AND WES HILL AND MR. WESTERFIELD HAD SOME ABILITY TO WORK IN THAT FIELD, CORRECT?A.:CORRECT.Q.:AND YOU GUYS GOT PAID.A.:WE PAID OURSELVES, YES.Q.:ALL RIGHT.
AND PART OF THE ACCEPTING OR REJECTING BUSINESS WOULD BE ON WHETHER OR NOT THE COMPENSATION WOULD BE WORTHWHILE, WOULDN’T IT?A.:YES.Q.:THERE WERE THINGS THAT YOU WOULD TURN DOWN IF YOU WEREN’T GOING TO GET PAID ENOUGH.A.:WE LEARNED.Q.:THERE WERE THINGS THAT YOU TURNED DOWN THAT YOU WOULDN’T GET PAID ENOUGH.A.:YES.Q.:AND THERE WERE THINGS THAT YOU ACCEPTED WHERE YOU FOUND THE PAY ACCEPTABLE.A.:YES. RIGHT.Q.:IS THAT BASICALLY HOW YOU DECIDED WHAT TYPE OF PROJECTS TO ACCEPT AND REJECT?A.:WELL, WE WERE YOUNG AND STUPID. WE TRIED EVERYTHING. BUT WE LEARNED EVENTUALLY THERE WERE SOME THINGS WE JUST COULDN’T DO. AND IT WAS THAT TRIAL AND ERROR.Q.:AND WHEN YOU SAY YOU COULDN’T DO THEM, IT WOULD NOT BE FINANCIALLY WORTHWHILE TO DO SOME OF THESE PROJECTS.A.:YES.Q.:AND THOSE THAT WERE FINANCIALLY WORTHWHILE, YOU WOULD DO THEM?A.:CORRECT.Q.:WHO CAME UP WITH THE NAME SPECTRUM?A.:I DON’T REMEMBER. I DON’T REMEMBER.Q.:WHO KEPT THE NAME SPECTRUM?A.:DAVID DID.Q.:WHY?A.:BASICALLY I LEFT. I DON’T REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED TO DAVE AND WES, BUT I LEFT TO PURSUE MY OWN VENTURES WITH CONCEPT DESIGN.Q.:SO YOU TOOK —A.:IT WAS A FALLOUT. WE DIDN’T SEE EYE TO EYE ON A LOT OF THINGS. AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS. WE WANTED TO PRESERVE THE FRIENDSHIP, BUT WE DIDN’T WANT TO, YOU KNOW, KILL EACH OTHER IN THE MEANTIME. DON’T TAKE THAT WORD LITERALLY. BUT IT’S JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS. WE JUST DIDN’T WANT TO RUIN A FRIENDSHIP, SO WE DECIDED IT WAS AMIABLE WE JUST SEPARATE.Q.:WAS IT ABOUT MONEY?A.:MONEY AND A PHILOSOPHY. HOW MUCH EACH GETS PAID FOR THE WORK THEY DO.Q.:WHY DID HE KEEP THE NAME SPECTRUM?A.:I DON’T KNOW. I DON’T KNOW.Q.:HE STILL USES IT, DOESN’T HE?A.:YES, HE DOES.Q.:YOU TALKED ABOUT SOCIALIZING WITH THE DEFENDANT.A.:M-HM.Q.:DOES THAT MEAN PARTYING?A.:ONE OR TWO PARTIES. HIS HOUSE. ONE OR TWO AT MY HOUSE.Q.:ONE OF THEM WAS A HALLOWEEN PARTY?A.:YES, IT WAS.Q.:OTHERS WERE ADULT PARTIES?A.:NO. NO. NOW THERE’S FAMILY. EVERYBODY WENT THERE. A LOT OF FAMILIES WERE THERE.Q.:DIDN’T YOU TELL US AT LEAST YOU SHOWED UP A COUPLE TIMES WITHOUT YOUR KIDS?A.:RIGHT. WELL, THE ONLY ONE TIME THAT I REMEMBER A PARTY THAT WE DIDN’T SHOW UP BECAUSE WE HAD A YOUNGER DAUGHTER WHO WAS ONE OR TWO, AND IT WAS A LATE PARTY, SO WE FOUND A BABYSITTER.Q.:DRINKING GOING ON?A.:YES. NOT TOO EXTREME.Q.:HOW ABOUT THE DEFENDANT; WOULD HE DRINK?A.:HIS FAVORITE WAS RUM AND COKE.Q.:TO EXCESS?
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. SCOPE. RELEVANCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:YOU TALKED ABOUT HIM MEETING JACKIE WESTERFIELD AT ONE OF THESE WORK LOCATIONS. IS THAT CORRECT?A.:CORRECT. AT HYDRO PRODUCTS.Q.:HOW LONG AGO?A.:PROBABLY 1978, ’79, SOMEWHERES IN THERE. I’M NOT SURE.Q.:DID YOU GET A CHANCE TO OBSERVE THE DEFENDANT AROUND HER OR OTHER FEMALE COWORKERS?
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. RELEVANCE. SCOPE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:YOU TALKED ABOUT HIM BEING GENEROUS WITH HIS TIME.A.:M-HM.Q.:IS THAT RIGHT?A.:M-HM.Q.:IS HE, BASED UPON THAT ASSESSMENT, IS HE THE TYPE OF PERSON WHO, IF SOMEBODY WAS IN NEED, HE WOULD GO TO THEIR AID?A.:YES.Q.:RATHER THAN PURSUING HIS OWN INDIVIDUAL DESIRES?A.:YES.Q.:SUCH AS IF —
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. RELEVANCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED, AND I HAVE NO QUESTION PENDING, SO I WILL HEAR THE QUESTION. AND YOU CAN OBJECT IF YOU ARE SO INCLINED.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:SO THAT HE WOULD PUT THE NEEDS OF OTHER ACQUAINTANCES OR FRIENDS ABOVE HIS PERSONAL NEEDS?A.:YES, HE WOULD. HE WOULD DO THAT TO STRANGERS, TOO.Q.:SO THAT BASED UPON YOUR ASSESSMENT OF HIM AND YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF HIM, HE WOULD BE THE TYPE OF PERSON WHO WOULD, SAY, AID A NEIGHBOR AS OPPOSED TO GOING ON A WEEKEND TRIP?
MR. BOYCE: OBJECTION. RELEVANCE. 352.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. DUSEK: NOTHING FURTHER.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ANYTHING FURTHER? REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:IN YOUR WORK AT HYDRO PRODUCTS, SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE AN IDEA, IS THAT RIGHT?A.:CORRECT.Q.:AND YOU AND/OR DAVID WOULD MAKE IT WORK?A.:CORRECT.Q.:AND THAT WAS A DESIGN PART OF IT, ISN’T IT?A.:THE DESIGN PORTION OF IT IS WHAT WE MADE WORK.Q.:SO DAVID’S DESIGN WORK WAS ESSENTIALLY AN INVENTION, WASN’T IT?A.:NOT AT THAT COMPANY PER SE. WE WERE MERELY — WE WOULD GET THE ORDERS AND THE DIRECTION FROM ABOVE. IT WOULD COME TO ENGINEERING. WE WOULD WORK WITH ENGINEERING TO DEVELOP IT. AND IT GOES TO PRODUCTION. THEN ESSENTIALLY TO SALES.Q.:BUT WITHOUT, SAY, DAVID’S CONTRIBUTION ON THE 125, —A.:M-HM.Q.:— THE PRODUCT WOULDN’T HAVE WORKED, WOULD IT?A.:PROBABLY. BUT, LIKE I SAY, IT COULD HAVE BEEN OTHER DESIGNER IN THERE TO DO THAT. JUST HAPPENED TO BE DAVID.Q.:BUT DAVID WAS THE ONE THAT DID THE DESIGN ON 125.A.:YES. BUT HE WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT HELPED THE DESIGN.Q.:AND WITH THAT HELP THAT PRODUCT WAS DESIGNED TO COMPLETION.A.:YES.Q.:WAS PUT IN PRODUCTION.A.:YES.Q.:AND SAVED THE LIVES OF DIVERS, DIDN’T IT?A.:YES, IT DID.Q.:AND AFTER HYDRO PRODUCTS YOU AND DAVID LEFT AND FORMED YOUR OWN COMPANY.A.:THAT WAS DURING OUR INVOLVEMENT THERE. JUST AS — YEAH. THAT WAS DURING MY INVOLVEMENT THERE, YES.Q.:WHILE YOU WERE WORKING HYDRO PRODUCTS.A.:RIGHT. RIGHT.Q.:AND AFTER SPECTRUM YOU REMAINED FRIENDS.A.:YES.Q.:YOU WORKED TOGETHER AGAIN AT SUTTER.A.:YES.Q.:IN FACT, DAVID GOT YOU THE JOB THERE.A.:I WOULDN’T SAY THAT. BUT, NO, HE — WELL, HE GAVE ME A GREAT OFFER THERE. AND IT WAS — COMBINED WITH THAT OFFER AND MY ABILITIES, YES, HE HELPED ME OUT.Q.:YOU MENTIONED THAT DAVID WESTERFIELD WAS A PROJECT MANAGER ON ONE OF THE PRODUCTS AT SUTTER THAT YOU WERE AWARE OF.A.:YES.Q.:WHAT PROJECT WAS THAT?A.:A COUPLE OF THEM. THE — THEY WERE C.P.M. DEVICES, ITEMS THAT WOULD ACTUALLY HELP THE PATIENTS RECOVER FASTER FROM LIGAMENT, KNEE, OR HIP REPLACEMENTS. THEY JUST BASICALLY MOVED THE LEG UP AND DOWN AT A CERTAIN SPEED, CERTAIN RATE, CERTAIN FORCE. AND DAVID WAS VERY — HE WAS VERY KEY ON THAT PROJECT.Q.:WHEN YOU SAY C.P.M., WHAT DOES THAT STAND FOR?A.:CONTINUOUS PASSIVE MOTION.Q.:THIS WAS A PRODUCT THAT DAVID WAS INVOLVED IN MANAGING?A.:YES.Q.:AND IN ALSO DESIGNING?A.:YES.Q.:AND YOU WERE FAMILIAR WITH THAT PROJECT?A.:I WAS PART OF THAT TEAM AS WELL.Q.:WITHOUT HIS IDEAS, INVENTION, AS FAR AS DESIGN IS CONCERNED, THAT PROJECT WOULDN’T HAVE WORKED, WOULD IT?A.:WELL, IT WORKED WITH HIM. WHETHER IT WOULD HAVE WORKED OR NOT, YOU KNOW, IT DEPENDS. HE WAS THE ONE DOING IT; HE MADE IT WORK. SORRY TO BE VAGUE, BUT HE WAS THERE, HE DID IT. HE WAS THE TEAM LEADER.
MR. BOYCE: THANK YOU.
I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
THE COURT: ANYTHING FURTHER?
MR. DUSEK: NO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. LAWRENCE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING IN. YOU’RE FREE TO LEAVE.
PLEASE REMEMBER, HOWEVER, YOU’RE UNDER AN ADMONITION NOT TO DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY ‘TIL THIS MATTER IS CONCLUDED. OKAY.
THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
(THE WITNESS WAS EXCUSED.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. BOYCE.
MR. BOYCE: WE CALL CARMEN GENOVESE. CARMEN GENOVESE,
CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE DEFENDANT, HAVING BEEN DULY SWORN, TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
THE CLERK: SIR, WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL IT FOR THE RECORD.
THE WITNESS: MY NAME IS CARMEN GENOVESE. C-A-R-M-E-N
G-E-N-O-V-E-S-E. DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:GOOD MORNING, MR. GENOVESE.A.:THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING.Q.:WHAT IS YOUR OCCUPATION?A.:I’M A VICE-PRESIDENT OF ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS FOR A COMPANY HERE IN SAN DIEGO.Q.:ARE YOU AN ENGINEER?A.:YES, I AM.Q.:DO YOU KNOW A PERSON BY THE NAME OF DAVID WESTERFIELD?A.:YES, I DO.Q.:HOW LONG HAVE YOU KNOWN MR. WESTERFIELD?A.:OH, APPROXIMATELY TWENTY YEARS.Q.:WHEN DID YOU MEET HIM?A.:SAY IN 1983.Q.:WHERE DID YOU MEET HIM?A.:AT SUTTER BIOMEDICAL.Q.:WHAT WAS SUTTER BIOMEDICAL?A.:SUTTER IS A COMPANY THAT MANUFACTURED C.P.M. DEVICES AND IMPLANTS.Q.:WHEN YOU MET MR. WESTERFIELD, WHAT WAS YOUR POSITION AT SUTTER?A.:I WAS HIS DIRECT SUPERVISOR. I WAS VICE-PRESIDENT OF ENGINEERING AT THAT TIME.Q.:WHAT WAS MR. WESTERFIELD’S POSITION AT SUTTER?A.:HE WAS A DESIGN ENGINEERING MANAGER. HE WAS LEADING A TEAM THAT DESIGNED A HOME C.P.M. DEVICE.Q.:WHEN YOU SAY C.P.M. DEVICE, WHAT DOES THAT STAND FOR?A.:IT’S CONTINUOUS PASSIVE MOTION.Q.:YOU WERE HIS BOSS?A.:THAT’S RIGHT.Q.:AND ALSO WERE YOU THE BOSS OF RON LAWRENCE?A.:YES, I WAS.Q.:WAS THAT THE PERSON THAT JUST LEFT THE COURTROOM?A.:THAT’S RIGHT.Q.:AT THE TIME THAT YOU MET MR. WESTERFIELD, WAS HE MARRIED THEN?A.:YES, HE WAS.Q.:TO A PERSON BY THE NAME OF JACKIE WESTERFIELD?A.:THAT’S RIGHT.Q.:DID YOU ALSO GO TO MR. WESTERFIELD’S HOUSE?A.:OCCASIONALLY, YES.Q.:ON SOCIAL OCCASIONS?A.:SOCIAL EVENTS, YES.Q.:DID HE COME TO YOUR HOUSE?A.:YES, HE DID.Q.:WHAT TYPE OF OCCASIONS WOULD HE COME TO YOUR HOUSE ON?A.:PARTIES, BARBECUES. HE’S BEEN TO MY PLACE IN MEXICO AS WELL.Q.:DO YOU HAVE KIDS?A.:YES, I DO.Q.:AND ARE YOUR CHILDREN, DO THEY KNOW HIS CHILDREN?A.:I BELIEVE THEY DO, YES.Q.:THESE EVENTS THAT YOU WOULD GO TO HIS HOUSE, WERE THEY FAMILY EVENTS WITH YOUR CHILDREN AND HIS CHILDREN?A.:I DON’T REMEMBER BRINGING MY KIDS TO HIS HOME, BUT HIS CHILDREN HAVE BEEN TO MINE.Q.:NOW, YOU MENTIONED A — WHAT WAS THE DEVICE? IT WAS A PASSIVE MOTION DEVICE?A.:A CONTINUOUS PASSIVE MOTION DEVICE, YES.Q.:WHAT WAS — WAS MR. WESTERFIELD INVOLVED IN THAT DEVICE?A.:HE WAS THE CHIEF ARCHITECT OF THAT DEVICE THAT WE WERE DESIGNING.Q.:WHEN YOU SAY CHIEF ARCHITECT, CAN YOU TELL ME AND TELL THE JURY A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS.A.:RIGHT. HE WAS THE PRIMARY DESIGNER. HE WAS THE PERSON THAT CAME UP WITH THE IDEA, HOW THE DEVICE TO BE DESIGNED. ALL THE PARTICULARS ABOUT THE DEVICE. HOW IT’S SUPPOSED TO FUNCTION, ET CETERA.Q.:HE MADE THE DEVICE WORK IN OTHER WORDS?A.:THAT’S RIGHT.Q.:WHAT DID THIS PASSIVE MOTION DEVICE DO?A.:WELL, THIS IS A DEVICE THAT’S USED TO REHABILITATE INDIVIDUALS THAT UNDERGO SURGERY FOR EITHER RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, EITHER KNEE, HIP, ANY OF THE MAJOR JOINTS. THE PARTICULAR DEVICE THAT HE DESIGNED WAS A HOME C.P.M. DEVICE THAT WAS INTENDED TO BE USED AT THE HOME. WHEN PATIENTS LEAVE THE HOSPITAL IMMEDIATELY POST OP., THEY’RE SENT HOME WITH ONE OF THESE DEVICES.Q.:SO WHAT, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WHAT WOULD THE DEVICE DO OR ASSIST THE PERSON —A.:THE PURPOSE OF THE DEVICE? THE OLD THEORY, WHICH IS BACK SOME YEARS AGO, IS THAT WHEN INDIVIDUALS UNDERGO SURGERY, IT WOULD TYPICALLY GET — THE JOINTS GET IMMOBILIZED. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT TYPICALLY HAPPENS WHEN THE JOINT IS IMMOBILIZED AND FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, THE JOINT STIFFENS AND SOMETIMES REQUIRES SURGERY, ANOTHER SURGERY, IN ORDER TO BREAK THE JOINT LOOSE AGAIN.
SO A DOCTOR SOME YEARS AGO CAME AND DEVELOPED A THEORY THAT IF YOU CONTINUOUSLY MOVE A JOINT PASSIVELY, THAT THE JOINT WOULD REHEAL A LOT FASTER, THE COLLAGEN FORMING MORE SYSTEMATICALLY. ESSENTIALLY IT — WELL, THE HEALING PROCESS OBVIOUSLY IS ACCELERATED.
SO THESE PARTICULAR DEVICES, THE DEVICE THAT DAVE DESIGNED IS A DEVICE WHERE IT WAS INTENDED FOR HOME FOR THE LEG. FOR THE LEG, BOTH FOR KNEE AND FOR HIP. AND THE IDEA BEHIND THE DEVICE IS TO CONTINUOUSLY AND PASSIVELY MOVE THE JOINT WITHOUT IMPARTING ANY PRESSURE AT THE SITE OF SURGERY SO THAT THE JOINT CONTINUOUSLY MOVES, IT LUBRICATES, AND ENHANCES THE HEALING PROCESS.Q.:AFTER MR. WESTERFIELD DESIGNED THIS DEVICE, WAS IT MARKETED?A.:OH, ABSOLUTELY. QUITE EXTENSIVELY.Q.:BY SUTTER BIOMEDICAL?A.:THAT’S RIGHT.Q.:WHERE WAS IT MARKETED?A.:ALL THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES. I WOULD SAY THOUSANDS OF DEVICES AND THOUSANDS OF PATIENTS WERE PUT INTO THE DEVICES.Q.:AND THIS DEVICE ESSENTIALLY EASED THE PAIN OF PERSONS THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH SURGERY AND KNEE REPLACEMENTS?A.:WELL, MORE THAN THAT. MORE THAN EASE THE PAIN. IT ACTUALLY ENHANCED THE HEALING TO WHERE AT TIMES PRIOR TO THESE TYPES OF DEVICES PATIENTS WOULD TAKE WEEKS AND MONTHS TO REHABILITATE. WITH THESE DEVICES IT WOULD TAKE THEM, YOU GO HOME IMMEDIATELY POST OP., TYPICALLY WITHIN ONE DAY, AND THE REHEALING PROCESS WITHIN A FEW DAYS, WITHIN A FEW WEEKS, THE RANGE OF MOTION WOULD INCREASE TO THE POINT WHERE THEY COULD WALK QUICKLY.Q.:NOW, DID — WHILE MR. WESTERFIELD WAS AT SUTTER, DID HE WORK ON OTHER DEVICES?A.:YES, HE DID.Q.:CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT SOME OF THOSE OTHER DEVICES.A.:THE OTHER — SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT I REMEMBER HE WORKED ON, HE DESIGNED SOME SILICON IMPLANTS FOR THE HAND. AND ONE OF THE PARTICULAR — IN FACT, I BELIEVE HE HAS A PATENT ON THAT. THE PARTICULAR DIFFERENCE ABOUT THIS DEVICE THAT HE DESIGNED WAS IT WAS VERY ANATOMIC; IT WAS VERY EASILY MIMIC THE RANGE — THE MOTION THAT A HAND WOULD UNDERGO. AND, THUS, THAT’S WHY HE GOT A PATENT ON IT. THAT PARTICULAR DEVICE WAS MARKETED EXTENSIVELY IN EUROPE, NOT SO MUCH IN THE UNITED STATES.Q.:WERE THERE ANY OTHER DEVICES THAT HE WORKED ON?A.:AT SUTTER? I DON’T RECALL AFTER THOSE DEVICES.Q.:NOW, BACK TO THE PASSIVE MOTION DEVICE JUST FOR A MOMENT. WAS THERE A DOCTOR HE WORKED ON WITH THE —A.:RIGHT. DR. COUTTS, THE ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON HERE IN SAN DIEGO. HE WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING US, YOU KNOW, DEVELOP THE DEVICE BOTH FROM THE MEDICAL POINT OF VIEW, YOU KNOW, GIVING US DIRECTION AS TO WHICH WAY THE DEVICE NEEDS TO BE DESIGNED, AND ALSO BY DOING EXTENSIVE TESTING TO DETERMINE THE EFFICACY OF THE PRODUCT, WHETHER IT REALLY WORKED FOR CERTAIN PATIENTS AND CERTAIN INDICATIONS.Q.:WHO WAS THE DOCTOR?A.:DR. COUTTS. RICHARD COUTTS.
THE COURT: COULD YOU SPELL THAT LAST NAME FOR MY REPORTER.
THE WITNESS: I BELIEVE IT’S C-O-U-T-S.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
MR. BOYCE: I BELIEVE IT’S C-O-U-T-T-S.
THE WITNESS: I’M SORRY. T-T-S.
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:HOW LONG DID YOU WORK AT SUTTER?A.:IT WAS ABOUT SIX YEARS.Q.:WHEN DID YOU LEAVE?A.:I LEFT IN 1989.Q.:DID YOU WORK WITH MR. WESTERFIELD AGAIN AFTER SUTTER?A.:OH, MANY MORE TIMES, YES. I JOINED TECHNOVISION AFTER SUTTER BIOMEDICAL. AND AFTER SOME SHORT PERIOD OF TIME I ASKED DAVE TO JOIN ME AS WELL THERE.Q.:WHAT DID YOU WORK ON AT TECHNOVISION?A.:WELL, TECHNOVISION WE DESIGNED A PRODUCT THAT ENABLED OPTOMETRISTS AND OPHTHALMOLOGISTS TO CAST PRESCRIPTION-READY LENSES IN A DOCTOR’S OFFICE. AND HE HELPED DESIGN SOME OF THE DEVICES THAT WERE REQUIRED FOR THAT PRODUCT.Q.:WERE THESE — WERE THERE TECHNICAL PROBLEMS THAT MR. WESTERFIELD WORKED ON?A.:WELL, WE HAD — ACTUALLY WE DID HAVE A MAJOR ISSUE IN YIELD, PRODUCTION YIELD, WITH THE PRODUCT, IN MANUFACTURING THE LENS MOLDS. THESE ARE THE DEVICES THAT ARE USED TO CAST LENSES. WE WERE EXPERIENCING SOME ROUGHLY FIFTEEN TO TWENTY PER CENT YIELDS. SOME OF THE WORK THAT HE DID IN DESIGNING STAINLESS STEEL MOLD BASES ENABLED US TO GET US TO THE YIELDS UP IN THE SEVENTY-FIVE TO EIGHTY PER CENT.Q.:AND CAN YOU EXPAND ON THAT A LITTLE BIT. WHAT’S THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT?A.:WHAT, THE YIELD?Q.:YES.A.:OH. WELL, OBVIOUSLY YIELD IS HOW MANY GOOD VERSUS HOW MANY BADS YOU PRODUCE IN A UNIT TIME. SO IF YOU HAVE A FIFTEEN-PER-CENT YIELD, YOU KNOW, FIFTEEN ARE GOOD AND EIGHTY-FIVE ARE OUT, SO OBVIOUSLY YOU WANT TO INCREASE YOUR YIELD TO THE POINT WHERE YOU HAVE CLOSE TO A HUNDRED PER CENT. IT REDUCES COST, ET CETERA.Q.:AND MR. WESTERFIELD’S ROLE IN THIS WAS DESIGNING IT SO IT BECAME MORE MARKETABLE?A.:OH. ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY.Q.:AND THIS WAS THE MOLD THAT ASSISTED OPTOMETRISTS OR OPTICIANS IN MAKING LENSES, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:ACTUALLY IT WAS MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT. THE MOLD WAS USED IN OUR MANUFACTURING FACILITY TO PRODUCE — THE STAINLESS STEEL MOLD HE DESIGNED WAS USED AS THE MAJOR — THE MAIN BASE FOR PRODUCING THE MOLDS THAT WE MANUFACTURED AND SOLD TO THE OPTOMETRIST. SO THAT WAS THE MASTER, IF YOU WILL. HAD TO BE VERY CAREFULLY GROUND, VERY PERFECTLY HONED SO THAT IT HAS ALL THE CORRECT SHAPE, THE CORRECT CURVATURE.Q.:SO MR. WESTERFIELD’S DESIGN WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERCOMING THESE TECHNICAL HURDLES IN THE CASTING OF THESE MOLDS?A.:ABSOLUTELY.Q.:WAS THIS A SIMPLE JOB OR WAS THIS A DIFFICULT JOB?A.:IT WAS A VERY DIFFICULT JOB. ABSOLUTELY. YOU KNOW, THE STANDARD IN THE INDUSTRY FOR THE PROCESS THAT WAS USED TO MANUFACTURE MOLDS IS CALLED ELECTROFORMING, WHERE IT’S A COMBINATION OF CHEMICAL, ELECTRICAL PROCESS, ELECTROLYSIS PROCESS, WHERE YOU PUT NICKEL COMPOUNDS INTO A BATH, AND BY INTRODUCING ELECTRIC CURRENT, THE NICKEL MIGRATES OVER TO THIS MOLD BASE, THUS PRODUCING AN EXACT DUPLICATE OF THE MOLD. SO IT’S A VERY COMPLICATED PROCESS. QUITE A BIT OF SCIENCE, A LITTLE BIT OF ART, TO MAKE IT WORK.Q.:AFTER TECHNOVISION, DID YOU WORK WITH MR. WESTERFIELD AT ANY OTHER COMPANIES?A.:YES. I — WHEN I LEFT TECHNOVISION, I JOINED PRIMARY ACCESS HERE IN SAN DIEGO.Q.:WHEN DID YOU JOIN PRIMARY ACCESS?A.:I’M THINKING IT WAS EITHER ’91, 1991.Q.:AND WHAT WAS YOUR JOB AT PRIMARY ACCESS?A.:I WAS IN CHARGE OF OPERATIONS THERE.Q.:WHAT DID MR. WESTERFIELD DO?A.:WELL, MR. WESTERFIELD, DAVID WESTERFIELD JOINED THE ENGINEERING TEAM, SO I WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN INTRODUCING HIM TO THE ENGINEERING TEAM. AND HE WAS THE DESIGN ENGINEER THERE. THE DESIGN ENGINEERING MANAGER THAT DESIGNED THE DEVICES THAT PRIMARY ACCESS MARKETED. PRIMARY ACCESS WAS IN THE TELECOM INDUSTRY. THEY PRODUCED A SOFTWARE DEFINABLE INTERNET ACCESS CONCENTRATORS. FOR EXAMPLE, THE PEOPLE THAT GO INTO THE INTERNET, THEY WOULD DIAL UP A PHONE NUMBER, AND OUR DEVICES, PRIMARY ACCESS, WOULD ANSWER THE PHONE AND CONNECT THEM TO THE INTERNET.Q.:WHAT WAS MR. WESTERFIELD’S ROLE IN THAT DESIGN?A.:HE DESIGNED THE NEXT-GENERATION PRODUCT WHICH WENT INTO THE MARKET AND WE SOLD QUITE A FEW OF. IN FACT, THAT WAS ONE OF THE PRODUCTS THAT MADE A. O. L. GET PRETTY FAMOUS.Q.:WAS THIS SOMETHING THAT ANYBODY COULD DO OR DID THIS TAKE SOME CREATIVE, CREATIVITY AND IMAGINATION?A.:OBVIOUSLY THERE’S MORE THAN ONE PERSON THAT COULD DO IT, BUT HE’S VERY CREATIVE GUY AND DESIGNED A PRODUCT TO THE POINT WHERE IT WAS VERY EASILY MANUFACTURABLE. A VERY TALENTED GUY. HE WOULDN’T BE, IF HE WEREN’T TALENTED, I WOULDN’T KEEP HIRING HIM.Q.:AFTER THE DESIGN YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT, WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WORKED ON WITH MR. WESTERFIELD?A.:WHEN I LEFT, — PRIMARY ACCESS WAS ACQUIRED BY THREE COM., AND SO AFTER THAT ACQUISITION, I MOVED ON TO ANOTHER COMPANY CALLED SINGLE CHIP SYSTEMS, WHERE WE MANUFACTURED R.F.I.D. PRODUCTS. R.F.I.D. IS AN ELECTRONIC VERSION OF BAR CODES USED FOR LUGGAGE TAGS, FOR GROCERY TAGS AS WELL. DAVE DID NOT — I DID NOT NEED HIM ON A FULL-TIME BASIS ON THAT COMPANY BECAUSE WE DIDN’T HAVE ENOUGH WORK FOR HIM. BUT HE DID PRODUCE A NUMBER OF DESIGNS FOR ME AS A CONSULTANT AT THAT TIME. ONE WAS A DEVICE TO HELP MANUFACTURE THE PRODUCT. HE DESIGNED A PRODUCT FOR LUGGAGE TAGS WHICH IS CURRENTLY BEING USED IN THE SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT FOR AUTOMATICALLY DIVERTING LUGGAGES FOR SUSPECT TRAVELERS.Q.:SO THIS DESIGN IS A SECURITY DESIGN?A.:ABSOLUTELY. YEAH.Q.:IT’S PLACED ON LUGGAGE, AND THAT’S THE WAY THEY TELL WHICH THEY CAN — WHAT EXACTLY CAN THEY DO WITH THAT?A.:THE WAY THEY WOULD WORK IS WHEN AN INTERNATIONAL TRAVELER WILL COME TO THE TICKET COUNTER, THE TICKET AGENT WOULD MAKE A JUDGMENT BASED ON WHATEVER, AND BASED ON THAT JUDGMENT THEY WOULD DECIDE WHETHER THAT PARTICULAR PERSON’S LUGGAGE NEEDS TO BE FURTHER SCREENED. AND IF THEY DID, THEY WOULD INTRODUCE THIS LUGGAGE TAG INTO THEIR BAGGAGE, LUGGAGE. AND THEN IT WOULD, WHEN IT WOULD GO THROUGH THE AUTOMATIC EQUIPMENT, SORTING EQUIPMENT, IT WOULD SORT THE SPECIFIC LUGGAGE SO THEY CAN GET ADDITIONAL SCREENING.Q.:AND MR. WESTERFIELD WAS INVOLVED IN THE DESIGN OF THIS SECURITY DEVICE, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:HE WAS. THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THAT YOU SAW DAVID WESTERFIELD?A.:I WOULD SAY ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF TO TWO YEARS AGO. WELL, OTHER THAN A FEW MONTHS AGO JUST BEFORE HE WAS ARRESTED.Q.:WAS THAT AT HIS HOUSE?A.:YES.Q.:AND WAS THAT AT A TIME WHEN YOU WENT THERE WITH MR. LAWRENCE?A.:YES.Q.:MR. GENOVESE, I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU A FEW EXHIBITS. FIRST OF ALL, WHAT’S BEEN MARKED AS COURT’S EXHIBIT 216. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT PATENT?A.:YES, I DO.
(PATENT MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 216 FOR
IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:AND WHAT PATENT IS THAT FOR?A.:THIS IS A PATENT FOR THE HOME C.P.M. THAT WE JUST SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER.Q.:AND IS MR. WESTERFIELD ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT APPEAR ON THE — AS AN INVENTOR OF THAT DEVICE?A.:YES. ABSOLUTELY. YES, HE IS.Q.:AND WHAT IS THE DATE OF THAT PATENT?A.:THAT’S — IT WAS ISSUED MAY 2ND, 1989.Q.:THANK YOU.
NOW REFERRING TO WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS EXHIBIT 217. DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT 217 REPRESENTS?A.:YES. THIS IS THE HOME C.P.M. THAT HE DESIGNED.
(PHOTOGRAPH MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 217 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:THERE ALSO APPEARS TO BE —A.:THOSE ARE DIFFERENT VIEWS OF IT.Q.:— TWO PHOTOS ON THE BACK OF —A.:RIGHT.Q.:— 217.A.:RIGHT. YEAH.
I MUST TELL YOU THAT THIS PARTICULAR DEVICE WAS VERY REVOLUTIONARY FOR ITS TIME. FOR DAVID ABSOLUTELY DESERVED CONGRATULATIONS ON THAT.Q.:ITEM 218, DO YOU RECOGNIZE —A.:THIS IS THE SAME DEVICE. AND THIS IS THE ELECTRONICS BEHIND IT.
(PHOTOGRAPH MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 218 FOR
IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:AND WHEN YOU’RE REFERRING TO THE ELECTRONICS BEHIND IT, THAT’S THE BACK OF 218?A.:RIGHT. THIS IS THE — THIS IS THE HAND-HELD REMOTE- CONTROL DEVICE THAT WAS USED BOTH BY THE CLINICIAN WHEN HE INSTALLED THE DEVICE ON THE PATIENT AND ALSO WAS USED BY THE PATIENT IF HE HAD TO MAKE ANY MODIFICATIONS IN TERMS OF THE MODALITY OF THE DEVICE.Q.:REFERRING TO WHAT’S BEEN MARKED AS EXHIBIT 221. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT EXHIBIT?A.:THESE ARE THE — THESE ARE A BROCHURE OF THE VARIOUS IMPLANTS THAT I SPOKE OF. AND I THINK THE UNIQUENESS ABOUT THE DEVICE IS HOW THIS PARTICULAR PORTION OF THE DESIGN, WHERE IT ACTUALLY MIMICKED THE WAY THAT THE HUMAN JOINT MOVES.
(BROCHURE MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 221 FOR
IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:REFERRING TO WHAT’S BEEN MARKED AS COURT’S EXHIBIT 222. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT PATENT?A.:YES, I DO.
(PATENT MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 222 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:AND WHAT PATENT IS THAT FOR?A.:THIS IS THE PATENT FOR THE IMPLANT THAT WE JUST SHOWED THE PICTURE OF. THIS DEVICE HERE.Q.:DOES MR. WESTERFIELD, WAS HE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT PATENT?A.:YES, HE WAS.Q.:AND HIS NAME APPEARS IN THAT PATENT AS ONE OF THE INVENTORS?A.:EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS A SECONDARY INVENTOR, HE WAS ABSOLUTELY THE PERSON THAT DESIGNED THE DEVICE. THE OTHER INVENTOR WAS A CONTRIBUTORY MANNER. HE HAD VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH THE DESIGN.Q.:THERE WAS A DOCTOR THAT CAME UP WITH THIS IDEA, THOUGH, AND MR. WESTERFIELD DESIGNED IT, IS THAT RIGHT?A.:ACTUALLY I BELIEVE DAVID CAME UP WITH THE IDEA. THESE PARTICULAR DEVICES ARE NOT NEW. WHAT IS NEW IS THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF DESIGN, HOW IT’S ANATOMIC IN NATURE.Q.:REFERRING TO EXHIBIT 219. DO YOU RECOGNIZE EXHIBIT 219?A.:YES. THESE ARE LITERATURE WITH RESPECT TO TECHNOVISION. AND THERE’S PHOTOGRAPHS ON THE BACK OF SOME OF THE DEVICES THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN DESIGNING.
(TECHNOVISION LITERATURE AND PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 219 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:YOU ARE REFERRING TO THREE PHOTOGRAPHS ON THE BACK OF 219. AND WHAT ARE THOSE DEVICES?A.:WELL, THE TOP ONE, REMEMBER WHEN I SPOKE OF ELECTROFORMING PROCESS, THIS IS THE EQUIPMENT THAT WAS USED TO PRODUCE THE ELECTROFORM MOLDS. THIS OTHER DEVICE IS — SOME OF THE EQUIPMENT BEHIND THE REST OF IT IS THE EQUIPMENT THAT’S USED TO RUN THE ELECTROFORMING PROCESS.Q.:YOU’RE REFERRING TO THE MIDDLE PHOTOGRAPH ON THE BACK OF 219?A.:YES.Q.:REFERRING TO EXHIBIT 220. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT PHOTOGRAPH?A.:THIS LOOKS LIKE A DEVICE THAT WAS USED FOR PRODUCTION PROCESS AT SINGLE CHIP SYSTEMS.
(PHOTOGRAPH MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 220 FOR
IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT MR. WESTERFIELD WAS INVOLVED IN THE DESIGN OF?A.:HE WAS THE DESIGNER OF THIS DEVICE.Q.:AND, AGAIN, WHAT DID THE DEVICE IN 220 DO?A.:THIS IS A DEVICE THAT WAS USED FOR THE FINAL ASSEMBLY OF THE R.F.I.D. TAGS.Q.:AND THESE WERE THE LUGGAGE TAGS?A.:RIGHT. ACTUALLY THIS IS THE ELECTRONIC PORTION THAT WENT INSIDE OF THAT.Q.:AND YOU SAY THAT, YOU ARE REFERRING TO EXHIBIT TWO TWENTY — WHAT’S BEEN MARKED AS 225, ANOTHER DIAGRAM OR PHOTOGRAPH?A.:RIGHT. THESE ARE THE LUGGAGE TAG THAT I SPOKE OF. IT’S QUITE LARGE. ACTUALLY IN REALITY IT’S ONLY ABOUT TWO INCHES IN LENGTH. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY MADE QUITE A BIT LARGER TO EMPHASIZE THE DESIGN.
(PHOTOGRAPH MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 225 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE PHOTOGRAPH?A.:THE PHOTOGRAPH, RIGHT.Q.:REFERRING TO COURT’S EXHIBIT 226. DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT —A.:THIS IS ANOTHER EXERCISE IN ATTEMPTING TO DESIGN A LUGGAGE TAG. WE’VE DEVELOPED THIS ONE, AND WE FINALLY DECIDED ON THIS PARTICULAR PRODUCT BECAUSE OF ITS R.F. CHARACTERISTICS WORKED MUCH BETTER.
(PHOTOGRAPH MARKED TRIAL EXHIBIT NUMBER 226 FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:AND BOTH 225 AND 226, WERE THOSE PRODUCTS THAT MR. WESTERFIELD WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN DESIGNING?A.:HE WAS THE SOLE DESIGNER ON THEM, YES.Q.:I THINK I NEGLECTED TO ASK YOU THE DATE OF THE SECOND PATENT, THE IMPLANT.A.:THIS WAS ISSUED JUNE 24TH, 2002.Q.:THAT’S WHEN IT WAS PRINTED.A.:I’M SORRY. THE ISSUE DATE WAS OCTOBER 3RD, 1989.Q.:AND THAT’S EXHIBIT 222?A.:CORRECT.Q.:AND WHICH PATENT DOES THIS REFER TO?A.:THIS IS THE IMPLANT.Q.:THIS WAS THE IMPLANT IN THE HAND, IS THAT CORRECT?A.:FINGER. FOR THE FINGERS, THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:IT’S THE SURGICALLY IMPLANTED PROSTHESES?A.:ABSOLUTELY, YES.
MR. BOYCE: THANK YOU, MR. GENOVESE.
I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.
THE WITNESS: YOU’RE WELCOME.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:WHAT IS THE TITLE OF YOUR JOB, SIR?A.:I AM VICE-PRESIDENT OF ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS.Q.:ARE YOU AN ENGINEER?A.:YES, I AM.Q.:WHAT’S YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND?A.:I WENT TO UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOL, ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, AT DREXEL UNIVERSITY.Q.:AT WHERE? I’M SORRY.A.:DREXEL UNIVERSITY IN PHILADELPHIA. GRADUATE SCHOOL AT U. C. L. A., AND EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AT STANFORD UNIVERSITY.Q.:SO YOU HAVE BEEN TRAINED AT LEAST ACADEMICALLY IN THE ENGINEERING FIELD?A.:AND MANAGEMENT, YES.Q.:AND YOU’VE BEEN TRAINED BECAUSE OF WORK EXPERIENCE IN THE ENGINEERING FIELD.A.:YES, I HAVE.Q.:HOW ABOUT THE DEFENDANT; IS HE ACADEMICALLY TRAINED IN ENGINEERING?A.:I BELIEVE HE DID NOT COMPLETE HIS DEGREE.Q.:HE WENT TO JUNIOR COLLEGE?A.:I DON’T RECALL.Q.:AND YOU’RE GOOD FRIENDS WITH HIM, AREN’T YOU?A.:YES, I AM.Q.:IN FACT, WHEN YOU GOT ON THE STAND, YOU WINKED AT HIM, DIDN’T YOU?A.:I’M SORRY?Q.:YOU WINKED AT HIM, DIDN’T YOU?A.:OH, YEAH.Q.:YOU’VE LOOKED — KEEP LOOKING AT HIM THROUGHOUT YOUR TESTIMONY.A.:YES.Q.:YOU’VE BEEN A SPOKESMAN FOR HIM, HAVEN’T YOU?A.:YES.Q.:YOU’VE GONE ON THE RADIO TO TALK ABOUT YOUR FRIENDSHIP WITH HIM.A.:NOT BY DESIGN.Q.:DID YOU GO ON THE RADIO TO TALK ABOUT YOUR FRIENDSHIP WITH HIM?A.:YES, I HAVE.Q.:HOW MANY TIMES?A.:I BELIEVE TWICE.Q.:WHICH STATIONS?A.:I DON’T RECALL.Q.:WAS ONE OF THEM A TALK SHOW OUT OF LOS ANGELES?A.:I BELIEVE SO, YES.Q.:WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE?A.:I DON’T RECALL.Q.:WHEN WAS IT?A.:I THINK IT WAS PRIOR TO HIS ARREST.Q.:WERE BOTH OF THEM PRIOR TO HIS ARREST OR AFTER?A.:I THINK ALL OF THEM WERE.Q.:DID YOU GO ON A T.V. SHOW?A.:YES, I WAS.Q.:HOW MANY?A.:MAYBE THREE TIMES.Q.:WHICH STATIONS?A.:DON’T RECALL THE DAYS, BUT IT’S DEFINITELY BEFORE HIS ARREST.Q.:SAN DIEGO STATIONS?A.:SAN DIEGO. I THINK IT WAS NEW YORK. MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN LOS ANGELES. CHICAGO. I DON’T RECALL.Q.:HAVE YOU GIVEN NEWSPAPER INTERVIEWS?A.:YES, I HAVE.Q.:WHICH PAPERS?A.:THE “SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE.”Q.:WHEN?A.:PROBABLY EARLY ON IN THIS CASE.Q.:DURING THE TRIAL, WASN’T IT?A.:NO. I DON’T BELIEVE IT WAS DURING THE TRIAL. IN FACT, I REFUSED TO TALK TO THEM DURING THE TRIAL.Q.:HAVE YOU BEEN CONTACTED BY ANY OF THE “ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT,” THOSE TYPE OF SHOWS?A.:I DON’T RECALL BEING. NO, I HAVE NOT, ACTUALLY.Q.:ANYTHING LIKE THAT, ANY OF THOSE TYPES OF SHOWS?A.:NO.Q.:NO ONE’S OFFERED YOU ANY MONEY TO GIVE AN INTERVIEW?A.:NO.Q.:IN ALL, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU SPOKEN UP ON HIS BEHALF TO SHOW YOUR FRIENDSHIP?A.:MAYBE SIX TO SEVEN TIMES.Q.:YOU FIRST MET HIM TWENTY YEARS AGO?A.:YES.Q.:AND FROM THEN UNTIL NOW, HOW MANY DIFFERENT COMPANIES HAVE YOU WORKED FOR?A.:SIX.Q.:AND HOW MANY OF THOSE COMPANIES DID THE DEFENDANT WORK FOR?A.:WITH ME? FOUR. THREE PLUS AS A CONSULTANT, FOUR.Q.:SO EACH TIME YOU WOULD MOVE ON, HE WOULD MOVE ON WITH YOU?A.:ONLY IF I NEEDED HIS PARTICULAR SKILL, YES.Q.:AND HE WOULD LEAVE THE OLD COMPANY BEHIND?A.:YES.Q.:HE WOULD QUIT THE JOB THAT HE WAS DOING AT THE OLD COMPANY TO COME WITH YOU?
MR. FELDMAN: OBJECTION. FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. BOYCE: VAGUE AS TO WHICH JOB.
THE COURT: YOU MAY ANSWER.
OVERRULED.
IF IT’S WITHIN YOUR PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE, YOU MAY ANSWER, SIR.
THE WITNESS: SOMETIMES, YES.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:YOU WOULD OFFER HIM MORE MONEY?A.:YES.Q.:AND THESE PROJECTS THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT HIM DESIGNING, SOMEBODY WOULD GIVE YOU GUYS, AND BY YOU GUYS, I MEAN YOUR COMPANY, THE IDEA OF WHAT THEY WANTED, CORRECT?A.:SOMETIMES. SOMETIMES THE IDEAS WERE INITIATED INSIDE THE COMPANY.Q.:WELL, THE — THAT FIRST PATENT THING, THE —A.:THE CONTINUOUS PASSIVE MOTION DEVICE?Q.:DID THAT COME FROM YOUR COMPANY?A.:YES.Q.:THE IDEA?A.:YES.Q.:SO THAT WAS NOT — THE IDEA WAS NOT GENERATED BY A DOCTOR?A.:YES.Q.:WAS IT GENERATED BY A DOCTOR?A.:YES, IT WAS.Q.:AND THE DOCTOR, DID THE DOCTOR WORK FOR YOUR COMPANY?A.:THE DOCTOR WAS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR COMPANY, THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?A.:HE WAS ON RETAINER. HE WAS — I DON’T RECALL THE EXACT NATURE OF THE INTERFACE BETWEEN THE DOCTOR AND OUR COMPANY, BUT HE WAS DEFINITELY ASSOCIATED WITH US.Q.:HE HAD A MEDICAL PRACTICE, DIDN’T HE?A.:ABSOLUTELY. YEAH.Q.:AND IN HIS MEDICAL PRACTICE HE RECOGNIZED A NEED FOR THIS DEVICE, CORRECT?A.:THAT’S RIGHT.Q.:AND HE ASKED YOU GUYS TO HELP DESIGN IT?A.:YES.Q.:WERE YOU IN CHARGE OF THE COMPANY AT THAT TIME?A.:NO. I WAS VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE COMPANY.Q.:WERE YOU IN CHARGE OF THE PROJECT?A.:YES.Q.:HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE ON THE TEAM?A.:ON THAT PARTICULAR TEAM I BELIEVE SIX.Q.:YOU WERE IN CHARGE OR WAS SOMEONE ELSE IN CHARGE?
MR. FELDMAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE WITNESS: I’M NOT SURE —
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: — I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE QUESTION WAS IN CHARGE MEANS. HE REPORTED TO ME. HE WAS IN CHARGE OF THE PROJECT, SO ULTIMATELY I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR IT.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:WHO WAS ABOVE YOU?A.:THE PRESIDENT.Q.:SO THE PRESIDENT AND THEN YOU?A.:RIGHT.Q.:AND THEN YOU HAD HOW MANY PEOPLE UNDERNEATH YOU?A.:I DON’T RECALL THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE. BUT I HAD BOTH ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING UNDER ME. IN ENGINEERING I BELIEVE THERE WERE ABOUT TWELVE, THIRTEEN.Q.:AND THEY ALL HAD A HAND IN THE DESIGN AND PRODUCTION OF THIS INSTRUMENT?A.:IN SOME WAY. BUT VERY FEW WERE INVOLVED IN THE ACTUAL — THE INVENTION OR THE DESIGN OF IT.Q.:HOW MANY?A.:I DON’T RECALL. I THINK THERE WERE FIVE.Q.:ALL OF THEM PLAYED A PART IN IT?A.:SOME ROLE, YES.Q.:ALL RIGHT.
AND IF THAT PERSON, ANY OF THOSE FIVE PEOPLE, HAD NOT BEEN THERE, WOULD THE PROJECT HAVE COME TO A COMPLETE HALT?A.:WELL, TEMPORARILY, YES. UNTIL YOU REPLACE THE PERSON.Q.:THE PERSON WOULD HAVE BEEN REPLACED, THOUGH?A.:YES.Q.:EACH OF THOSE PEOPLE COULD HAVE BEEN REPLACED, COULDN’T THEY?A.:SURE. BUT I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU’RE GOING WITH THAT.Q.:YOU DON’T NEED TO.A.:OKAY.
MR. FELDMAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT WAS A GRATUITOUS REMARK. MOTION TO STRIKE, ADMONISH COUNSEL.
THE COURT: THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THE COMMENT OF COUNSEL.
JUST ASK A QUESTION, MR. DUSEK.
BY MR. DUSEK:Q.:AFTER — HOW LONG DID IT TAKE TO DESIGN THE ITEM?A.:I DON’T RECALL THE EXACT TIME, BUT I’M GUESSING BETWEEN SIX AND NINE MONTHS.Q.:AND WERE THERE OTHER THINGS THAT THE GROUP WAS WORKING ON WHILE THEY WERE DOING THAT?A.:NO. THEY WERE SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED ON THIS PARTICULAR DEVICE WHILE THIS WAS BEING DESIGNED.Q.:WAS THE DEFENDANT WORKING FOR THE COMPANY WHEN THE IDEA FIRST CAME INTO THE COMPANY?A.:DON’T KNOW. HE WAS HIRED BEFORE I WAS. HE WAS ALREADY WORKING ON THE PROJECT BEFORE I ARRIVED AT THE COMPANY.Q.:WAS HE WORKING ON THE PROJECT WHEN HE — WHEN THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETED?A.:OH, YES.Q.:HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LISTED AS INVENTORS?A.:I DON’T RECALL. I THINK FOUR OR FIVE.Q.:WERE YOU ONE OF THEM?A.:YES.Q.:WHAT DID YOU DO?A.:MY ROLE WAS IN THE ERGONOMICS, THE HUMAN INTERFACE, THE SOFT GOODS, AND JUST PROVIDING GENERAL, ALL-AROUND DIRECTION ON THE DEVICE.Q.:TELL ME WHAT SOME OF THOSE FIRST TERMS MEAN.A.:ERGONOMICS, MAKING SURE THE DEVICE WAS ANATOMIC IN DESIGN, REVIEWING SOME OF THE WORK THAT DAVE DID AND HELPING HIM IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.Q.:REVIEWING HIS WORK AND OTHERS’ WORK, CORRECT?A.:OH, YES. SURE.Q.:SO THERE WERE LOTS OF PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT?A.:RIGHT. THERE WERE. AS I MENTIONED, HE WAS THE PRIMARY DESIGNER, THOUGH.Q.:ALL RIGHT.
AND WHO WAS DAVID PATCH?A.:DAVID PATCH WAS ANOTHER MECHANICAL ENGINEER. HIS ROLE WAS MORE IN THE POWER PLANT OF THE DEVICE WHICH WAS THE MOTORS AND THE ELECTRONICS THAT WENT BEHIND THAT.Q.:HOW ABOUT JOHN GROSS; WHAT DID HE DO?A.:JOHN GROSS WAS AN ELECTRICAL AND SOFTWARE ENGINEER. HE WAS — HE WORKED WITH — TRYING TO REMEMBER THE OTHER GENTLEMAN — IN DEVELOPING THE ELECTRONICS.Q.:SO THESE PEOPLE WOULD COME UP WITH THE IDEAS AND ENGINEERINGLY TRY TO DETERMINE HOW IT WOULD WORK?A.:WELL, ACTUALLY IT’S THE OTHER WAY AROUND. WE FIRST DESIGN THE CONCEPT AND DEVELOP A SPEC. AND DEFINE EXACTLY WHICH WAY WE’RE GOING WITH THE DESIGN, AND THEN THESE INDIVIDUALS WOULD GO AHEAD AND DO THE DESIGN. SO THE PARTICULAR PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THAT PATENT CAME UP WITH SOME OF THESE IDEAS ON HOW THE PRODUCT SHOULD BE DESIGNED, AND THEN THEY EXERCISED THE DESIGN.Q.:WHO WAS CHRISTOPHER DUMAS?A.:CHRIS DUMAS, HE WAS THE OTHER ELECTRICAL ENGINEER. I FORGOT HIS NAME. YES, HE WAS THE OTHER ONE ON THE PATENT.Q.:SO ALL OF THESE WERE — AND I — ENGINEERS WITH COLLEGE DEGREES?A.:CHRIS WAS, JOHN WAS. I BELIEVE DAVE PATCH MAY NOT HAVE BEEN. I DON’T RECALL.Q.:AND THEY WOULD DO THE ENGINEERING WORK ON THIS ITEM?A.:RIGHT.Q.:AND THEN THE DEFENDANT WOULD SOMEHOW MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT’S SUPPOSED TO LOOK?A.:YOU’RE MAKING IT SOUND LIKE HE GAVE IT A FACELIFT. NO. HE ACTUALLY CAME UP WITH THE MAIN DESIGN OF THE PRODUCT. THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE PRODUCT IS THE MECHANICS, AND THAT’S WHAT HE DESIGNED. OH, THE OTHER INDIVIDUALS WERE JUST ANCILLARY PARTICIPANTS IN THE ELECTRONICS, THE MOTORS AND EVERYTHING. BUT THE MAIN CRUX OF THE SYSTEM, WHICH IS ALL OF THE MECHANICS AND HOW IT’S ANATOMIC IN DESIGN, WAS DAVE’S IDEA.Q.:THIS WAS BACK HOW LONG AGO?A.:1983.Q.:WAS IT USED IN THIS COUNTRY?A.:EXTENSIVELY.Q.:WAS THERE A NEWER AND BETTER ONE OUT THERE NOW?A.:I’M SURE.Q.:THAT’S KIND OF THE WAY THESE THINGS GO, ISN’T IT?A.:OF COURSE.Q.:SOMEONE INVENTS A GOOD THING RIGHT NOW AND SOMEBODY IMPROVES UPON IT LATER.A.:SOMEBODY COPIES IT, OF COURSE.Q.:WERE YOU GUYS IMPROVING UPON SOMETHING THAT ALREADY EXISTED?A.:THE CONCEPT OF C.P.M. DID EXIST, YES. WE DID NOT — SUTTER DID NOT INVENT THE CONCEPT.Q.:ALL RIGHT.
SO YOU GUYS WERE MAKING A NEW AND BETTER PRODUCT?A.:YES. SURE.Q.:ALL RIGHT.
THIS KNUCKLE DEVICE, —A.:THE IMPLANT.Q.:— THAT YOU TOLD US ABOUT, —A.:RIGHT.Q.:— KNUCKLE IMPLANT, —A.:RIGHT.Q.:— YOU SAID THAT WAS MARKETED OVERSEAS PRIMARILY.A.:IN EUROPE.Q.:WHY NOT HERE?A.:I DON’T KNOW. THAT’S WHERE IT WAS BEING MARKETED. THERE WERE PLENTY OF COMPETITION FOR THOSE PRODUCTS OBVIOUSLY.Q.:NOW, THIS WOULD BE A MEDICAL DEVICE?A.:YES.Q.:AND IT WOULD BE USED IN SURGERY, CORRECT?A.:THAT’S RIGHT.Q.:WOULD THAT MEAN THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE SOME SORT OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT APPROVAL TO BE MARKETED HERE, USED HERE IN THE UNTIED STATES?A.:F. D. A., YES. IT WAS MARKETED HERE. IT JUST WAS NOT EXTENSIVELY MARKETED IN THE UNITED STATES.Q.:WERE THERE OTHER DEVICES DOING THE SAME THING?A.:ABSOLUTELY.Q.:AND THOSE WERE SELLING BETTER?A.:DON’T KNOW.Q.:SO THERE WERE OTHER DEVICES PROVIDING THE SAME BENEFITS TO THE PEOPLE THAT NEEDED THOSE DEVICES?A.:OF COURSE.Q.:AND IN THAT DEVICE WAS MR. WESTERFIELD PART OF A TEAM?A.:ACTUALLY HE WAS THE SOLE DESIGNER ON THAT PRODUCT.Q.:WHOSE IDEA WAS IT?A.:FOR THAT PARTICULAR DESIGN, IT WAS HIS.Q.:WHERE DID THE IDEA COME FROM, THOUGH?A.:THE IDEA FOR A NEED FOR SUCH A DEVICE?Q.:YES.A.:I DON’T RECALL. BUT THE DESIGN, HOW TO DESIGN IT, HOW TO MAKE IT ANATOMIC, WAS STRICTLY DAVE’S IDEA.Q.:WERE THERE ENGINEERS INVOLVED IN THAT PROJECT?A.:HE WAS THE SOLE ENGINEER ON IT.Q.:NOBODY ELSE WORKED ON THAT PROJECT EXCEPT HIM?A.:NOT THAT I CAN RECALL.Q.:DID YOU CHECK BEFORE YOU CAME HERE TO SEE?A.:I’M SORRY?Q.:SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE WAS INVOLVED ON THAT.A.:NO, I DID NOT.Q.:THIS AIRPORT DEVICE, —A.:YES.Q.:— THAT YOU HAVE, HOW LONG AGO WAS THAT COMPLETED?A.:THAT WAS ABOUT THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO.Q.:WAS A NEW AND IMPROVED VERSION OF WHAT WAS IN EXISTENCE AT THE TIME?A.:THERE WAS NO SUCH DEVICE ON THE MARKET RIGHT NOW EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE.Q.:ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU SAY THIS ONE IS BEING USED UP IN SAN FRANCISCO.A.:AT THE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, YES.Q.:WHAT’S BEING USED IN LOS ANGELES, CHICAGO, NEW YORK?A.:THEY DID NOT INSTALL THIS YET.Q.:THEY HAVE OTHER WAYS OF HANDLING SECURITY?A.:DON’T KNOW HOW THEY HANDLED THAT.Q.:SAN FRANCISCO IS THE ONLY PLACE YOU KNOW OF WHERE THEY’RE USING IT?A.:THAT’S THE FIRST PRODUCT, THAT’S THE FIRST PLACE WHERE THIS PARTICULAR PRODUCT WAS INTRODUCED.Q.:WAS THIS A PRODUCT THAT CAME OUT OF YOUR COMPANY?A.:YES.Q.:COMPANY’S NAME WAS?A.:SINGLE CHIP SYSTEMS.Q.:ARE YOU STILL WITH THAT COMPANY?A.:NO.Q.:WHEN DID YOU LEAVE THEM?A.:I LEFT THEM ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO. AND I COFOUNDED MY OWN COMPANY AFTER THAT.Q.:DID YOU TAKE THE DEFENDANT ALONG WITH YOU TO THE NEW COMPANY?A.:NO.Q.:DID YOU WORK WITH SPECTRUM?A.:NO.Q.:DO YOU KNOW WHAT SPECTRUM IS?A.:YES. I KNOW SPECTRUM. I HAVE USED THE SERVICES OF SPECTRUM. AND THAT’S WHEN I WAS — WHEN I HIRED DAVE TO DO THE WORK FOR ME AT SINGLE CHIP SYSTEM. IT WAS UNDER THE SPECTRUM STRUCTURE AND DESIGN.Q.:THAT WAS HIS COMPANY?A.:YES.Q.:YOU TALKED ABOUT ONE OF THESE PROJECTS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE YIELD.A.:THAT WAS AT TECHNOVISION, THAT’S RIGHT.Q.:WHAT PROJECT WAS IT?A.:THAT WAS AN OPHTHALMIC PRODUCT THAT’S TO CAST PRESCRIPTION-READY LENSES, YES.Q.:AND TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM — IF YOU SOLVE THE PROBLEM, YOU MAKE MORE MONEY.A.:ABSOLUTELY. IT’S THE AMERICAN WAY.Q.:I’M SORRY?A.:I’M SORRY. IT’S THE AMERICAN WAY.Q.:YOU HAD NOT SEEN THE DEFENDANT FOR ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF TO TWO YEARS BEFORE FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR?A.:RIGHT.Q.:HADN’T SOCIALIZED WITH HIM?A.:THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:HADN’T WORKED WITH HIM?A.:NOT FOR A YEAR AND A HALF, THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:DIDN’T KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOING DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME.A.:THAT’S CORRECT. WELL, I — NOT TOTALLY CORRECT, BECAUSE I KNEW THAT HE WAS STILL DOING WORK FOR SINGLE CHIP SYSTEMS, SO I KEPT IN TOUCH WITH THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE THERE, AND THEY WERE TELLING ME THAT HE WAS. PERSONALLY I DID NOT TALK WITH HIM.Q.:THAT’S WHAT I’M CONCERNED WITH HERE.
BUT YOU DID MEET WITH HIM SOME TIME HERE IN FEBRUARY.A.:I THINK IT WAS FEBRUARY 7TH IF I’M NOT MISTAKEN.Q.:DID YOU ASK HIM WHAT HE DID?
MR. FELDMAN: SCOPE. OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. DUSEK: NOTHING FURTHER.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ANYTHING FURTHER, MR. BOYCE?
MR. BOYCE: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BOYCE:Q.:THE IMPLANT DEVICE THAT MR. DUSEK JUST REFERRED TO, THE PATENT ON THAT DEVICE, WHO DOES IT LIST ON THE PATENT AS THE INVENTOR?A.:THERE ARE TWO INDIVIDUALS. JAMES CHRISTENSEN AND DAVID WESTERFIELD.Q.:AND WAS MR. CHRISTENSEN, WHAT WAS HIS ROLE, DO YOU KNOW?A.:I BELIEVE HE WAS JUST — HE WAS COUNSELING. BUT, AS I SAID, IN TERMS OF DESIGN, IT WAS COMPLETELY DAVE WESTERFIELD’S DESIGN.Q.:HE INVENTED THE SIZE AND SHAPE OF THAT?A.:HE INVENTED THAT DEVICE, THAT’S CORRECT.Q.:HE INVENTED THE PROCESS?A.:FOR MANUFACTURING IT?Q.:YES.A.:NO. THE PROCESS IS WELL KNOWN. IT’S A SILICON MOLD PROCESS THAT’S PRETTY WELL KNOWN.Q.:DID HE INVENT THE MOLDING EQUIPMENT FOR THAT PRODUCT?A.:I THINK HE DESIGNED THE MOLD AS WELL TO MAKE THAT WORK. IT REQUIRED SOME PRETTY UNIQUE DESIGNS IN ORDER TO GET THE MOLD TO RELEASE PROPERLY FOR SOME OF THE UNDERCUTS THAT WERE IN THE DESIGN.
MR. BOYCE: THANK YOU, MR. GENOVESE.
THE COURT: ANYTHING FURTHER?
MR. DUSEK: NO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR, FOR COMING IN. YOU ARE FREE TO LEAVE. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT YOU’RE NOT TO DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY UNTIL THE MATTER IS CONCLUDED.
YOU CAN JUST LEAVE ALL THAT RIGHT THERE.
THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.
(THE WITNESS WAS EXCUSED.)
THE COURT: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I THINK WE WILL GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE MORNING RECESS.
PLEASE REMEMBER THE ADMONITION OF THE COURT NOT TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY OR EXPRESS ANY OPINIONS ON THIS MATTER UNTIL IT IS SUBMITTED TO YOU FOR DECISION.
PLEASE BE OUTSIDE THE DOOR AT TWENTY MINUTES ‘TIL. THAT WILL BE 10:40, PLEASE.
(RECESS, 10:26 O’CLOCK, A.M., TO 10:40 O’CLOCK, A.M.)
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /

Post navigation

Search Unposted.com

Search for (keywords+press enter):

man wanted for questioning in Michael Negrete’s disappearance

A sketch was drawn, posted, and distributed. No one has seen this man on the sketch since the night Michael Negrete disappeared.Left: Damon Van Dam in 2002, in my opinion he happens to have some resemblance with the man wanted for questioning in Michael’s caseRight: sketch drawn in 1999 portraying the man wanted for questioning in Michael Negrete's disappearance